4 ms·

Typescript can be very complex - it can also be incredibly simple - it's up to you how far you want to take it. Sure it can be an adventure to express somethin

Typescript can be very complex - it can also be incredibly simple - it's up to you how far you want to take it. Sure it can be an adventure to express something fully in it - but this is true for any type system I've seen. And I haven't seen another type system that's integrated into a dynamic ecosystem as well (IMO python is 5 years behind in terms of type checking experience) and that lets you chose the level of type sophistication that makes sense. Static typing, code analysis, automated testing, etc. are all great tools that become counterproductive past a certain point. Where that point is highly depends on what you're doing and typescript is one of the most flexible type systems at letting you make that choice. I'd say a lot of people are terrible at recognizing when they went too far with it for no practical gain. My only problem with it is that they can't fix the shit JS semantics.

giraffe_lady 3y ago
I am professionally familiar with typescript and explicitly not making a concrete argument for or against it right now. I'm just pointing out that having an opinion about typescript is not the same thing as having an opinion about types. Something I think people are (intentionally?) conflating in these comments.
- rmilejczz 3y ago
  I think it’s just a path a lot of developers have traveled, starting with JavaScript and moving to TypeScript. If you’ve gone through that pipeline than you probably feel very strongly about the benefits that TypeScript provides and it’s the fulcrum for your opinion on static vs dynamic typing Too many web developers, basically, I don’t think the conflation is intentional
  - PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
    I think you have to give typescript a bit of a pass in terms of types. MS had unique constraints when designing it originally, so it's never going to meet the expectations of more hardcore "typists", but I think they've done a great job given the unique challenges. Not perfect for sure, but it's one of the few newer technologies where I think it's a clear win.

giraffe_lady 3y ago

I am professionally familiar with typescript and explicitly not making a concrete argument for or against it right now. I'm just pointing out that having an opinion about typescript is not the same thing as having an opinion about types. Something I think people are (intentionally?) conflating in these comments.

rmilejczz 3y ago
I think it’s just a path a lot of developers have traveled, starting with JavaScript and moving to TypeScript. If you’ve gone through that pipeline than you probably feel very strongly about the benefits that TypeScript provides and it’s the fulcrum for your opinion on static vs dynamic typing Too many web developers, basically, I don’t think the conflation is intentional
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y ago
  I think you have to give typescript a bit of a pass in terms of types. MS had unique constraints when designing it originally, so it's never going to meet the expectations of more hardcore "typists", but I think they've done a great job given the unique challenges. Not perfect for sure, but it's one of the few newer technologies where I think it's a clear win.